Fatty gorges herself to death whilst in hospital.

Associate
Joined
30 Oct 2003
Posts
1,387
Location
Aberdeen
It sounds like liberal clap trap but I honestly think that the solution is better education and less nannying by the state. I for one don't want to get myself in a situation whereby I am dependant upon anyone else, let alone state handouts - this seems not to be a mindset shared by most, but it should be - by everyone.

Education is definitely a key element, hopefully this can be achieved through schools and via parents. The problem is the imbalance in the resources available in giving positive messages, as opposed to the million spent my advertisers encouraging us to consume junk. I can't see any government ever being prepared to seriously curtail advertising of junk food and general poor lifestyles. To be honest I'm not sure I would want them to either, it all sounds a bit too big brother like to me.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
24,560
Location
Amsterdam,The Netherlands
isn't fertility treatment already an area that is being looked at for potential cost saving?
Here in The Netherlands some stuff is also removed form the basic NHS and put into an extra insurance you can take on top of the basic mandatory NHS, but the things that are taken out are 'extra's' like fertility treatment or birth control pills, not letting smokers pay their own bills if they get something smoking related.
 
Associate
Joined
7 Jul 2010
Posts
1,537
Location
London
Why stop there

Actually she cost a fair bit, not only in direct amount paid to care for her fatness, and also her surgery, but also from the previous things that were tried such as her time at the priory, which the Sun alleges cost £5K a week for 24 weeks, before she checked herself out as she didn't like the food.

They need to start puttign stipulations on what the NHS covers and will cover in future, if people do nothing to help themselves, we shouldn't (as taxpayers) continue to pay for them to do nothing to help themselves.

Cut them off, and you will see improvement in the situation. In this woman's case the husband quit his job to care for his Jabba. Seriously, he gave up paid employment to care OVERFEED his wife. That sort of rubbish cripples society, when it is repeated large scale.

The NHS should start to set limits now, such as for those under an age or born from this day, there will be no provision for x or y if you do and continue to a or b.
Such as no COPD care paid for if you smoke, for those born today, they will have 16 years to think about their lifestyle choice, in the full knowledge that if they smoke they will pay for their own COPD care when they require it.
You could set a similar rule for being overweight, if you weigh more than one quarter of a ton, as this woman did, you pay for you own medical care and home care, and shipping costs when you need transported on the back of a truck around the place.

Its simple basic finances, and monetary incentives tend to work better in prevention.

1. Mabye if you drink more than 2 pints a week you should be refused care
2. If you fail to wear in-flight socks on an aeroplane thereby increasing the chance of deep-vein thrombosis so we should deny you care

Et al.

How can any of these things be monitored - you either have universal health care (perhaps with some additional top-up contribution), you have effective affordable insurance or you end up like the US.

Arbritrarily imposing conditions is just unworkable and unfair in an environement of universal health care.
 
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
29,491
Location
Back in East London
I didn't quote the rest because it was a statement saying she had a mental illness from someone who I very much doubt is qualified to make that diagnosis and was just repeating the same stuff as said earlier in other threads, and doesn't go any way towards debunking what I said.

Well done on getting that totally wrong.
What "other threads"? What repeated statements? :confused:

You simply ignored the opening lines because they answer, and debunk, your reply.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
29 Aug 2006
Posts
4,153
Location
In a world of my own
What "other threads"? What repeated statements? :confused:

You simply ignored the opening lines because they answer, and debunk, your reply.

Sorry, by other threads I meant other posts in this thread - my bad.

Nothing about the opening lines "debunk" anything I've said, lets go over them shall we?

How could someone like the person described above not have a mental illness or disorder of some kind? Is this behaviour normal?

She could just be very greedy - there is no published information on her having a mental illness but a hell of a lot on her being extremely fat. She had to undergo an mental health assessment BEFORE being considered for a gastric band - as is normal procedure for this operation. She PASSED THE ASSESSMENT and was therefore found to be MENTALLY SOUND by people way more qualified to make that judgement than me, marl, DJ_Jestar or anyone else in this thread.

Like a great many people she had an illness which could not be treated.

She probably had a physical addiction to food - much like smokers have a physical addiction to nicotine. This doesn't make her mentally ill - just like smokers aren't mentally ill.

She was fat and greedy (and possibly addicted to food) - she died as a result of her own gluttony and her families stupidity.

This is a clear message to gluttons out there - keep your snout in the trough and die... Simples.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
29,491
Location
Back in East London
The physical addiction to smoking lasts a whopping 9 hours. After 9 hours of no smoking there is *no* nicotine in the body, so how can you be physically addicted to something that is not even in your system?

Mental problems not documented? So that just proves she wasn't studied. This leaves it open to if she was, or wasn't suffering a mental condition.

She could be very greedy, as a result of mental problems - most likely an eating disorder. The evidence is strongly for this - she was told she would DIE if she keeps gorging, yet she still did. There isn't much evidence for the other way.

Everything can be simplified when you ignore what is actually going on.
 
Soldato
Joined
8 Mar 2007
Posts
10,938
The physical addiction to smoking lasts a whopping 9 hours. After 9 hours of no smoking there is *no* nicotine in the body, so how can you be physically addicted to something that is not even in your system?

Rubbish, firstly it depends how much you smoke. Someone who has never smoked before and takes one puff may have the nicotine leasve after 9 hours but a 10 a dayer will have nicotine in their system for a few days and a heavy smoker can have nicotine traceable up to 30 days.

http://www.ehow.com/about_4675135_long-nicotine-stay-system_.html
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
Excellent input. Well thought out, would read again. A++++++++++++++++

I'm not sure if you where being sarcastic or just monumentally stupid when you said it.


Do you know what a physical addiction is?

If you are physically addicted you require the substance to be in your body to function normally (or at least acceptably).

You're not just addicted because it's in your system it's because your system requires it to function.


It's like saying how can you need food when you're starving.
 
Associate
Joined
1 May 2007
Posts
1,150
There is a big difference between being addicted to something, and wanting it.

i would like to see a system where part of your NI contributions actually go into your pot and when you use medical care it comes out of that. once all dried up you would have to pay or use an insurance policy to cover additional. People with spare could share theirs out with friends/family. I'm sure i read somewhere this system is used and it is extremely successful - maybe it could be adapted so your pot only gets used for self inflicted illness such as smoking related or chubby disease.
 
Back
Top Bottom